You see, he's right because it wasn't the first 120 you fired that killed him! It doesn't matter that he gave up every advantage he could ever have, it doesn't matter that he wasn't just purely defeating the missile by notching (a few times you could see multipathing happen), it doesn't even matter that not only could he never point his nose at you, he never even got within 9M range! The only thing that matters is that, regardless of how many mental hoops he has to jump through, he is (in his mind) right!
It’s actually much harder to notch in RB cause of how instructor and camera works, in SB it works 99% of time against mid-long range launches but the thing is that if you have no fox-3’s or just didnt manage to launch your missile before going defensive - you’re f*cked and doesn’t matter how many missiles you’ll manage to notch cause you won’t be able to point your nose at the target anymore and at some point the F-16 will get close enough to launch 9M and well… everyone knows how 9M works against perpendicular flying targets
@@СергейНикольский-я2ц yea, notching is still better than going cold most of the time. It is just that you have to shoot back at some point too. Tho tbh you could just abuse the HMD for that. Just pull the enemy into the gimbal limit lock with HMD shoot and get back into the notch.
No offense against mr Squishy, I like his videos often, so just take this as another perspective. I was recently in a match against him and he died, iirc, 8 times in his Flanker that match. With 9 or 10 kills. This was the first and only time I've seen him in a match, so it might have been anecdotal. I'm not gonna say anything more. In general, I think people will need more time to adjust. 10 years of furballism on the deck are hard to purge from peoples minds. Additionally, I have to side with King Truman from whatever chat this is in the video. I literally did the same thing today and yesteday to grind the Darters for the UK Gripen and while it *IS CERTAINLY* a challenge, it is not impossible. If I went in though with the mindeset of one, two or three years ago, it might have been impossible though. Or at least it would have felt this way. Notching works, Chaffing works. Will you be able to defeat every missile as if it was an R60 seeing a single flare? No! Is it still reliable *enough* ? Yes, yes it is. I advise everyone who thinks notching and chaffing is hard in WT to play a week of DCS modern combat. Not because "muh realism", but as a reality check. When you come back to WT, suddenly these techniques feel kinda easy, because they are much harder to do in DCS. And one last thing: What Squishy did, singling out an individual who died to an amraam and who is in support of the MP change is a bit lame. Yes, I die to Amraams too. Like, it happens, its a multiplayer game where people shoot each other. But that doesn't mean ARHs and/or the MP change are unfair. It's just different than before and I actually enjoy top tier now (except the team blue vs. red team imbalance, but thats another story).
@@Spicysauced I have gone through 6 stock grinds this patch between 12.3 and 13.0 BR. ARB at least, is hell. While I agree individually, missiles can be defeated pretty easily by notching + chaffing, the whole argument of "Just notch bro" is a bit dismissive. This is what I think squish was getting at (Though I to see where you're coming from with the whole "singled out" bit). Like, yes. I could notch one. How about the 3 others from differing angles shot by people who don't need to hold the lock. That and the missiles can be assisted by data-link to make defeating them harder (Not impossible). Additionally, even the most experienced players will sometimes fuck the notch. I've been notching ER's for as long as they've been in the game and sometimes even I fuck it up. That and the ARH's absolutely can be unfair situationally. Sometimes a near free win button Try to fight a competent F-15C player in a standard Flanker with Fox-1's only and tell me how many times you win. Now remember those two planes are only 0.3 BR apart. the combination of 16v16, MP reduction, and ARH's has rendered anything without Fox-3's at an inherent disadvantage against anything that has then. A damn AV-8B+ is now a superior BVR platform to a 12.0 Mig-29 because it has Fox-3's, and more radar missiles period. The capability gap in armament is sometimes just oppressive. People not being used to the changes is absolutely a factor. I see it every battle where players wielding F-15C's and F-16C's with Aim-120's hug the deck and refuse to use their primary strength, and don't display any competency in defending incoming missiles. But their skill issue should not act as a dismissal for the substantial issues simply slapping Fox-3's into the existing game with little change (bar multipathing) has done.
@@Spicysauced Iirc you went 2:2 in the Gripen and killed a bunch of AI. The player in this clip wants to nerf the effectiveness of chaffing. This was at the same time he was having a conversation about how easy it is. In both clips in the same game he eats the second AMRAAM in spite of using his notching and chaffing strategy. Top Tier sim is more just one side eating shit because they really do not have any authentic counterplay to planes that are just outright better in every practical way.
@@squishface80085 In a stock Gripen with 2 9Ms, correct :) "The player in this clip wants to nerf the effectiveness of chaffing. " Indeed, and that is a bad idea. Missiles do react to chaff irl, otherwise it wouldnt have been invented. Im with you regarding that part. But I do get the sense of you disliking the more realistic approach that was caused by the multipath nerf, which I cannot understand. I'm not trying to missionize, like what you wanna like, but rather Id like to understand this point of view. IMO, we cannot have fights with planes from the 2000s with ranges of an IR missile. Thats what we had before and I rarely touched anything top tier because of it. Regarding team balance/player numbers I have submitted a proposal in the forums, but its still on pending status. It will be published in the Maps, Missions & Events section. ---- "War Thunder at the moment suffers from great imbalance in teams in SB. The team with the US side always outnumbers the “team b”. This makes gameplay in any other team than the US team an auto loss 90% of the time, especially in high tier jet battles. I won’t go into in-depth discussions as to why this is the case (better US missiles/US planes being better known in the West/biggest chunk of WT players coming from US), instead I purely want to focus on how to make the game better for everyone. It simply isn’t fun to play with team b and being outnumbered all the time, nor is it fun to play with the US and shoot some poor fella who doesn’t even stand a chance against 2:1, 3:1 or higher odds against him. So my proposal is to balance sim lobbies via spawn cost. Simple example: - 4 v 4 → balanced team, everyone pays base spawn cost - 4 v 4 with one in the queue for team A → 25% higher player count on team A, 25% increased spawn cost for 5th team A player - 4 v 1 with one in the queue for team A → 400% higher player count on team A, 400% spawn cost increase for 5th team A player This could be programmed in literally a day and I’m convinced it would work. I wouldn’t hard cap team size to balance, everyone could still play - but they gotta pay for it."
@@squishface80085 In a stock Gripen with 2 9Ms, correct :) "The player in this clip wants to nerf the effectiveness of chaffing. " Indeed, and that is a bad idea. Missiles do react to chaff irl, otherwise it wouldnt have been invented. Im with you regarding that part. But I do get the sense of you disliking the more realistic approach that was caused by the multipath nerf, which I cannot understand. I'm not trying to missionize, like what you wanna like, but rather Id like to understand this point of view. IMO, we cannot have fights with planes from the 2000s with ranges of an IR missile. Thats what we had before and I rarely touched anything top tier because of it. Regarding team balance/player numbers I have submitted a proposal in the forums, but its still on pending status. It will be published in the Maps, Missions & Events section. ---- "War Thunder at the moment suffers from great imbalance in teams in SB. The team with the US side always outnumbers the “team b”. This makes gameplay in any other team than the US team an auto loss 90% of the time, especially in high tier jet battles. I won’t go into in-depth discussions as to why this is the case (better US missiles/US planes being better known in the West/biggest chunk of WT players coming from US), instead I purely want to focus on how to make the game better for everyone. It simply isn’t fun to play with team b and being outnumbered all the time, nor is it fun to play with the US and shoot some poor fella who doesn’t even stand a chance against 2:1, 3:1 or higher odds against him. So my proposal is to balance sim lobbies via spawn cost. Simple example: - 4 v 4 → balanced team, everyone pays base spawn cost - 4 v 4 with one in the queue for team A → 25% higher player count on team A, 25% increased spawn cost for 5th team A player - 4 v 1 with one in the queue for team A → 400% higher player count on team A, 400% spawn cost increase for 5th team A player This could be programmed in literally a day and I’m convinced it would work. I wouldn’t hard cap team size to balance, everyone could still play - but they gotta pay for it."
You see, he's right because it wasn't the first 120 you fired that killed him! It doesn't matter that he gave up every advantage he could ever have, it doesn't matter that he wasn't just purely defeating the missile by notching (a few times you could see multipathing happen), it doesn't even matter that not only could he never point his nose at you, he never even got within 9M range! The only thing that matters is that, regardless of how many mental hoops he has to jump through, he is (in his mind) right!
Man where do these people come off with this shit bruh, actually wild the mental gymnastics of this guy
If mental gymnastics was a sport, this guy would be a pro athlete.
Notching seems to be very iffy and unreliable, even in RB where everything is told to you
It’s actually much harder to notch in RB cause of how instructor and camera works, in SB it works 99% of time against mid-long range launches but the thing is that if you have no fox-3’s or just didnt manage to launch your missile before going defensive - you’re f*cked and doesn’t matter how many missiles you’ll manage to notch cause you won’t be able to point your nose at the target anymore and at some point the F-16 will get close enough to launch 9M and well… everyone knows how 9M works against perpendicular flying targets
@@СергейНикольский-я2ц aim 9 makes boom boom
@@СергейНикольский-я2ц yea, notching is still better than going cold most of the time. It is just that you have to shoot back at some point too. Tho tbh you could just abuse the HMD for that. Just pull the enemy into the gimbal limit lock with HMD shoot and get back into the notch.
@@freakmusicaddict aircraft that don't have hmd: death
Just notch bros when they give you their 6 for free
I knew it wasn’t just me who was having severe difficulty with notching aim120s
Hey uh, um Mr Squish Face, are you not in possession of the Mirage 2000 anymore?
No. I deleted it. It doesn't exist in the game.
:(
idk how yall have the mental to play this man
"we need bigger maps"
lord praise the notch
dude i had no idea that you were a diddy kong racing enjoyer🥂
I just want them to reduce the effectiveness at super close range, so frustrating seeing my MICA going for chaff when i can touch my opponent balls
Stop doing bad launches
Try Magic 2s then?
OHHH BOI HERE WE GO!!
squishy wishy pookie wookie...
a whopping 2 kills...
Skill issue ig
Bigger maps solve this.
As someone who considers notch + chaff a pretty reliable means of defeating radar missiles... this is a bad take...
No offense against mr Squishy, I like his videos often, so just take this as another perspective. I was recently in a match against him and he died, iirc, 8 times in his Flanker that match. With 9 or 10 kills. This was the first and only time I've seen him in a match, so it might have been anecdotal. I'm not gonna say anything more.
In general, I think people will need more time to adjust. 10 years of furballism on the deck are hard to purge from peoples minds.
Additionally, I have to side with King Truman from whatever chat this is in the video. I literally did the same thing today and yesteday to grind the Darters for the UK Gripen and while it *IS CERTAINLY* a challenge, it is not impossible.
If I went in though with the mindeset of one, two or three years ago, it might have been impossible though. Or at least it would have felt this way.
Notching works, Chaffing works. Will you be able to defeat every missile as if it was an R60 seeing a single flare? No! Is it still reliable *enough* ? Yes, yes it is.
I advise everyone who thinks notching and chaffing is hard in WT to play a week of DCS modern combat. Not because "muh realism", but as a reality check. When you come back to WT, suddenly these techniques feel kinda easy, because they are much harder to do in DCS.
And one last thing:
What Squishy did, singling out an individual who died to an amraam and who is in support of the MP change is a bit lame. Yes, I die to Amraams too.
Like, it happens, its a multiplayer game where people shoot each other. But that doesn't mean ARHs and/or the MP change are unfair. It's just different than before and I actually enjoy top tier now (except the team blue vs. red team imbalance, but thats another story).
@@Spicysauced I have gone through 6 stock grinds this patch between 12.3 and 13.0 BR. ARB at least, is hell. While I agree individually, missiles can be defeated pretty easily by notching + chaffing, the whole argument of "Just notch bro" is a bit dismissive. This is what I think squish was getting at (Though I to see where you're coming from with the whole "singled out" bit).
Like, yes. I could notch one. How about the 3 others from differing angles shot by people who don't need to hold the lock. That and the missiles can be assisted by data-link to make defeating them harder (Not impossible). Additionally, even the most experienced players will sometimes fuck the notch. I've been notching ER's for as long as they've been in the game and sometimes even I fuck it up.
That and the ARH's absolutely can be unfair situationally. Sometimes a near free win button Try to fight a competent F-15C player in a standard Flanker with Fox-1's only and tell me how many times you win. Now remember those two planes are only 0.3 BR apart. the combination of 16v16, MP reduction, and ARH's has rendered anything without Fox-3's at an inherent disadvantage against anything that has then. A damn AV-8B+ is now a superior BVR platform to a 12.0 Mig-29 because it has Fox-3's, and more radar missiles period. The capability gap in armament is sometimes just oppressive.
People not being used to the changes is absolutely a factor. I see it every battle where players wielding F-15C's and F-16C's with Aim-120's hug the deck and refuse to use their primary strength, and don't display any competency in defending incoming missiles. But their skill issue should not act as a dismissal for the substantial issues simply slapping Fox-3's into the existing game with little change (bar multipathing) has done.
@@Spicysauced
Iirc you went 2:2 in the Gripen and killed a bunch of AI.
The player in this clip wants to nerf the effectiveness of chaffing. This was at the same time he was having a conversation about how easy it is. In both clips in the same game he eats the second AMRAAM in spite of using his notching and chaffing strategy.
Top Tier sim is more just one side eating shit because they really do not have any authentic counterplay to planes that are just outright better in every practical way.
@@squishface80085 In a stock Gripen with 2 9Ms, correct :)
"The player in this clip wants to nerf the effectiveness of chaffing. "
Indeed, and that is a bad idea. Missiles do react to chaff irl, otherwise it wouldnt have been invented. Im with you regarding that part.
But I do get the sense of you disliking the more realistic approach that was caused by the multipath nerf, which I cannot understand. I'm not trying to missionize, like what you wanna like, but rather Id like to understand this point of view. IMO, we cannot have fights with planes from the 2000s with ranges of an IR missile. Thats what we had before and I rarely touched anything top tier because of it.
Regarding team balance/player numbers I have submitted a proposal in the forums, but its still on pending status. It will be published in the Maps, Missions & Events section.
----
"War Thunder at the moment suffers from great imbalance in teams in SB.
The team with the US side always outnumbers the “team b”.
This makes gameplay in any other team than the US team an auto loss 90% of the time, especially in high tier jet battles.
I won’t go into in-depth discussions as to why this is the case (better US missiles/US planes being better known in the West/biggest chunk of WT players coming from US), instead I purely want to focus on how to make the game better for everyone. It simply isn’t fun to play with team b and being outnumbered all the time, nor is it fun to play with the US and shoot some poor fella who doesn’t even stand a chance against 2:1, 3:1 or higher odds against him.
So my proposal is to balance sim lobbies via spawn cost.
Simple example:
- 4 v 4 → balanced team, everyone pays base spawn cost
- 4 v 4 with one in the queue for team A → 25% higher player count on team A, 25% increased spawn cost for 5th team A player
- 4 v 1 with one in the queue for team A → 400% higher player count on team A, 400% spawn cost increase for 5th team A player
This could be programmed in literally a day and I’m convinced it would work. I wouldn’t hard cap team size to balance, everyone could still play - but they gotta pay for it."
@@squishface80085 In a stock Gripen with 2 9Ms, correct :)
"The player in this clip wants to nerf the effectiveness of chaffing. "
Indeed, and that is a bad idea. Missiles do react to chaff irl, otherwise it wouldnt have been invented. Im with you regarding that part.
But I do get the sense of you disliking the more realistic approach that was caused by the multipath nerf, which I cannot understand. I'm not trying to missionize, like what you wanna like, but rather Id like to understand this point of view. IMO, we cannot have fights with planes from the 2000s with ranges of an IR missile. Thats what we had before and I rarely touched anything top tier because of it.
Regarding team balance/player numbers I have submitted a proposal in the forums, but its still on pending status. It will be published in the Maps, Missions & Events section.
----
"War Thunder at the moment suffers from great imbalance in teams in SB.
The team with the US side always outnumbers the “team b”.
This makes gameplay in any other team than the US team an auto loss 90% of the time, especially in high tier jet battles.
I won’t go into in-depth discussions as to why this is the case (better US missiles/US planes being better known in the West/biggest chunk of WT players coming from US), instead I purely want to focus on how to make the game better for everyone. It simply isn’t fun to play with team b and being outnumbered all the time, nor is it fun to play with the US and shoot some poor fella who doesn’t even stand a chance against 2:1, 3:1 or higher odds against him.
So my proposal is to balance sim lobbies via spawn cost.
Simple example:
- 4 v 4 → balanced team, everyone pays base spawn cost
- 4 v 4 with one in the queue for team A → 25% higher player count on team A, 25% increased spawn cost for 5th team A player
- 4 v 1 with one in the queue for team A → 400% higher player count on team A, 400% spawn cost increase for 5th team A player
This could be programmed in literally a day and I’m convinced it would work. I wouldn’t hard cap team size to balance, everyone could still play - but they gotta pay for it."
So meme